Modding Notice - Crossroads

[Flyer]

To be honest who would be a Mod if they had to start checking various posts from new members? The way the BBC ran their 606 site was a total pain in the arse to the point that by time a post had been approved you'd gone elsewhere and some innocuous posts were banned under their ludicrous 'House Rules'.

There's nothing wrong with the modding on this site, it's the one or two members who can't resist pushing it until their 'prey' actually 'bites, and we end up with the silly slanging matches. As for the wums from other boards leave it to our Mods to give them enough rope to hang themselves...

nobody wants a NK style BBC board but this place would be so much better with a couple of permanent bans plus a couple of board bans for other teams fans.

it really wouldn't take a lot to get sorted. also people should use the ignore list if they are being targeted, I only have 3 on there which is pretty good for a popular board.

 

[QPAAAAAGH]

Those who are childish enough to offer insults rather than opinions can and should simply be ignored in most cases. And people who can't bring themselves to ignore tedious jibes are just as bad and should also be ignored. However, we don't get too many decent QPR based threads on here these days and it is annoying as hell to have to read through 3 pages of playground dross to find the comments about the actual topic. So, if the mods are to spend any time trying to fix this problem (and I'm certainly not suggesting there is any onus on them to do so) then it would be better spent simply editing topics to removing the exchanges that offer nothing than insults so that what remains is at least readable. This weekend's BAE topic is a classic example as others have said. If the mods do this a few times (no questions asked, just use your valuable discretion) then hopefully those who insist on this type of behaviour will get fed up and stop.

 

[QPRNUTS]

It seems that approx every six months the members here are asked to take a long hard look at their behaviour. Things slip slowly but steadily over the days and weeks until the Mods feel that they have to step in. SB is correct in saying that there is an element of déjà vu here.
A huge amount of effort was put into the current set of house rules. IMO they are comprehensive and fair. The board voted almost unanimously in favour of them. Implementing them is the difficult part as the Mods don't want to be seen as being heavy handed.
The key to it all is respect for others and I as much as anybody else have been guilty of not applying this minimum requirement. Argument and disagreement is healthy and should be encouraged as we are all entitled to our opinion but there is no room for personal insults. That is where the Mods have to draw the line and take action.
The other day I got that frustrated with flyer I called him an idiot. That was completely unnecessary and unwarranted and to flyers credit he didn't respond. I immediately delegated the comment and apologised but as a former Mod, I really should have known better. Self modding is the key. Try keep it robust but clean and if you do step out of line, acknowledge it.
The rules state the punishment and timeframes to be expected for various offences.

 

[DT Footspa]

I try and never insult anyone... what is the point. This forum or any forum will always generate opinions ... thats why i post so much crap

Only words and I think our Mods do brilliantly to see through that. I like the fact that they understand its only entertainment and sometimes we are all on here to vent. Calling people names etc or their opinions rubbish will always be part of the course

I actually get very heated when we slag off our players because I don't think that is being a fan and is just the result of being fickle in todays game BUT I am wrong as everyone is allowed to comment within reason and let off steam... I think many including Brixton forgot that sometimes but that's just my opinion. I know that if we all met up in a room then in real life i am sure we would all get on great because on here most of us don't know what the hell we are talking about in the first place.

 

[Flyer]

It seems that approx every six months the members here are asked to take a long hard look at their behaviour. Things slip slowly but steadily over the days and weeks until the Mods feel that they have to step in. SB is correct in saying that there is an element of déjà vu here.
A huge amount of effort was put into the current set of house rules. IMO they are comprehensive and fair. The board voted almost unanimously in favour of them. Implementing them is the difficult part as the Mods don't want to be seen as being heavy handed.
The key to it all is respect for others and I as much as anybody else have been guilty of not applying this minimum requirement. Argument and disagreement is healthy and should be encouraged as we are all entitled to our opinion but there is no room for personal insults. That is where the Mods have to draw the line and take action.
The other day I got that frustrated with flyer I called him an idiot. That was completely unnecessary and unwarranted and to flyers credit he didn't respond. I immediately delegated the comment and apologised but as a former Mod, I really should have known better. Self modding is the key. Try keep it robust but clean and if you do step out of line, acknowledge it.
The rules state the punishment and timeframes to be expected for various offences.

I was not bothered by that and would have asked the mods to stop any punishment if they deemed it necessary.
we all get like that sometimes, there's a difference between that and constantly posting worse than that every single day.

swords posted that I was a mincer the other day, it didn't bother me but he should have been banned considering we have at least 2 gays on here and thats offensive to them.

I think the general consensus of the thread is to treat repeat offenders much harsher.

 

[rangercol]

My take:

1. Considering the football on offer I'm surprised at the civility sometimes - there is definitely a sense of impending doom amongst some of us that the league position on this occaision does lie.
2. The banality that some of the non QPR fans bring to this board is simply well banal - as soon as the Leicester supporter starts commenting it's a waste of time, he is a supreme Wummer who knows just to stay within the limits - Mods, your job is to ensure that the board remains within legal boundaries and that there is a fair amount of traffic, this guy is a headache for you.
3. Is the bickering and targeting that bad or any worse than previously? - Don't think so and those that let it get to them to start quoting libel laws need to take a deep breath and regain their perspective.
4. Roller & Nuts - We don't live in a democracy, you took the job so it's your rules - Remember it is traffic and within the law that counts.
5. The Young man currently residing in North East Italy being brought up at every opportunity surely doesn't help!!


By the way - these threads dont help either. IMO.

Those who are childish enough to offer insults rather than opinions can and should simply be ignored in most cases. And people who can't bring themselves to ignore tedious jibes are just as bad and should also be ignored. However, we don't get too many decent QPR based threads on here these days and it is annoying as hell to have to read through 3 pages of playground dross to find the comments about the actual topic. So, if the mods are to spend any time trying to fix this problem (and I'm certainly not suggesting there is any onus on them to do so) then it would be better spent simply editing topics to removing the exchanges that offer nothing than insults so that what remains is at least readable. This weekend's BAE topic is a classic example as others have said. If the mods do this a few times (no questions asked, just use your valuable discretion) then hopefully those who insist on this type of behaviour will get fed up and stop.

Ok. As this seems to have become more about myself and swords, all be it in an unspoken way, I just wanted to respond to these two points.

Danish.............I have absolutely no intention of ever suing anyone on here using libel law. I merely mentioned this to try to separate the position I have found myself in from those that are differences of opinion that get out of hand. Maybe not the best way to do that, but that was all I was intending to do.

QPAAAAGH.............You're absolutely right that people should be able to ignore tedious jibes without turning threads into a battleground. I'm sure I've probably done this in the past and I would have been out of order.
However, what I'm talking about on this thread is being accused, either directly or in an insinuating way, of being something that I'm not on many, separate occasions, on many different threads. A serious accusation that I think anyone on here would be furious about if it were made about them.

Hopefully that's cleared things up from my point of view. I won't post on this thread again.

 

[Kilburn]

Quite simple, 1st case = warning, 2nd case is a weeks ban, third case is a months ban and the 4th case is a permanent ban.

I think that is being lenient. Theres no point repeately banning someone for a week as they just come back and do it again.

Agree, but then also, what do you do with those who are banned, and then a few days later a mystery new poster appears...can the mods check IP addresses to confirm it is the same person. If not, banning is only a temporary solution.

Yes, I also agree with those ideas - offenders could perhaps be sent down to the Barnsley FC board as a "sin bin", and in that sandbox they could be restricted to just annoying one another, and mod Ric clears out the posts on a regular basis?

Our mods Roller & Nines do a tremendous job as guardians of our board and it is quite irresponsible that a few posters deliberately push the limits of decorum. If these individuals insist on slagging one another off, they should do this via PM and not hijack decent threads (e.g. the Mandela tribute thread back in Dec 2013).

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Silent Bob]

I guess everybodys tolerance levels for ''abuse'' (name calling, insults, insinuations etc) are different. I personally can't think of a single thing that if said to me by someone on this board, would cause me to lose my temper or get aggravated. It's just a forum, largely populated by people you don't know and will never meet. I therefore find it impossible to get wound up by people that don't (in the nicest possible sense) mean anything to me. That sounds really harsh reading it back but I can't figure out how else to word it!

Don't let yourselves get wound up by such trivial things!

I've always thought the board is fine the way it is, before the major rules change and even afterwards. Nothing serious needs to be changed in my opinion.

Mods are good, posters are generally good, threads are generally good and/or amusing.

BTW I really like Adel Taarabt. Top player.

 

[qprbeth]

I guess everybodys tolerance levels for ''abuse'' (name calling, insults, insinuations etc) are different. I personally can't think of a single thing that if said to me by someone on this board, would cause me to lose my temper or get aggravated. It's just a forum, largely populated by people you don't know and will never meet. I therefore find it impossible to get wound up by people that don't (in the nicest possible sense) mean anything to me. That sounds really harsh reading it back but I can't figure out how else to word it!
.

Well said Bob...I wish I had said that myself.


I am keen to hear all your views...they are all interesting, thought provoking, daft, contrary to mine.
The wummers I ignore. Even the bigots I hope to convert back to the righteous ways.
Please Mods continue as you are ...you too are doing a sterling job

And us lot...self-mod...say what you truly believe, do not deliberately hurt people or demean them.
The forum is a hotbed of interesting comments and thoughts...keep it up

 

[ForestG]

I was not bothered by that and would have asked the mods to stop any punishment if they deemed it necessary.
we all get like that sometimes, there's a difference between that and constantly posting worse than that every single day.

swords posted that I was a mincer the other day, it didn't bother me but he should have been banned considering we have at least 2 gays on here and thats offensive to them.

I think the general consensus of the thread is to treat repeat offenders much harsher.

What's a Mincer?

 

[Kilburn]

What's a Mincer?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mincer

 

[Kilburn]

What's a Mincer?

As opposed to a Minger

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=minger

Perhaps that is what Swords was aiming at?

 

[Swords Hoopster.]

4) However, the bating of fellow posters along with personal accusations that are happening regularly are the things that are ruining this forum for me. I take the point about it being a forum and most have never met and most likely never will, but I'm afraid that simply isn't the point. If someone accuses me of being something that I'm not, made on a thread where the accuser makes no effort to address the subject that's being discussed, instead just finds an opportunity to get a personal dig or accusation in, that is simply unacceptable.
I apologise to any on here who have been pissed off when I have got into a row, but I will NEVER sit back and take being (sometimes openly and sometimes insinuated) accused of being something that I'm not, especially something of a very serious nature where the accuser could be liable to prosecution for libel. This isn't about differing views on anything, we are all entitled to an opinion, but when a poster is targeted on nearly every thread by someone merely intent on winding them up and accusing them of things in a very personal way, then that is totally unacceptable and against our forum rules as I understand them.
5) I haven't made an official complaint about this. Not in my nature. I will abide by whatever the mods deem to be the right way to go.

This is obviously directed at me and this is the thread in question: http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/248445-Bae

If anyone is even remotely interested I would suggest they look at it and see who actually started it (I know it sounds childish but it is significant) and then see if anyone uses a very thinly veiled threat of violence on a fellow member before they then logged off. The violent thing is relevant because I have received a number of PM's from people threatening all sorts of violence on me who, out on the open Forum, you'd swear butter wouldn't melt. I've not reported any of these ridiculous things but just don't be hoodwinked into believing the sob story's of some who constantly play the victim card.

COL says I'm implying something "of a very serious nature" in this thread and that he's not made an official complaint? WTF?

I implied nothing, it was him that started it and him that implied everything!! Is that guy for real?

 

[Swords Hoopster.]

Frankly, those posters that revert to personal abuse and aggression have already shown that they are incapable of self-restraint; that there are repeat offenders in this regard shows this. A leopard doesn't change its spots and all that. To suggest, Travis, that resorting to such measures enriches the experience for us all is baloney. It is quite possible to have a mature and intelligent debate with your fellow contributors without dragging it down into the gutters and back alleys. The Open Debate thread proved this, although there were one or two that came onto it on the wind up. I'm all for stirring things up with alternative opinion, provided it is either constructive and intelligent, or delivered with overtly and inoffensive humour.

Herr Uber, if you're suggesting I went onto that thread on the wind up then I think you're out of order. There were a number of people on the wind up but I wasn't one of them. I debated you back and forth and there wasn't a cross word said.

I'm surprised and disappointed at that accusation.

 

[qprbeth]

Here we go again

 

[Swords Hoopster.]

If we do that, there's no need to draw up a published 'hit list' of those members who may have complained to the mods. All that does if provide those people who have been warned over their behaviour with a few names to go after for retribution, and will never do anything but make the situation worse.
This is why Swords' suggestion that the names of complainers be published is dumb.

Seeing as we're all getting things out in the open now, lets cut the pretense (bullsh*t) and speak openly.

Willy I'm not in the least bit surprised that you're the first one to come out against my suggestion because you're the chief offender in this regard. You were the one I had in mind when I put forward that proposal. I'm not too bothered with you reporting me as you have done on a number of occasions in the past but what did annoy me was your reporting of a highly respected member of this Board recently. I have it on very good authority that you reported this member, a person who I believe to be the best contributor on this Forum bar none and a total gentleman of whom I'm certain everyone else would agree. I honestly don't think this guy has offended anyone in his three or so years of being on here. Yet you, having had a reasonable debate with him, decided to go scurrying off to the Moderators and stick the knife in his back. God knows how many other people you've done it to too.

Its no wonder you find the idea of a "list" horrifying because if people seen the amount of times you've gone to the Moderators, they'd hound you off the Site for good!

 

[ForestG]

Thanks Kilburn..............

 

[Swords Hoopster.]

swords posted that I was a mincer the other day, it didn't bother me but he should have been banned considering we have at least 2 gays on here and thats offensive to them.

(1) I never called you a "mincer". I don't even know what it means but I presume it means homosexual.

(2) I called you a lady's panty-sniffer and that's a different thing entirely.

(3) Any mincers on here can take offence for themselves and don't need you to do it for them.

(4) Some might say you've been trolling all season and wanting us to lose but I don't want to see you banned for it. Troll away to your heart's content.

 

[West London Willy]

Seeing as we're all getting things out in the open now, lets cut the pretense (bullsh*t) and speak openly.

Willy I'm not in the least bit surprised that you're the first one to come out against my suggestion because you're the chief offender in this regard. You were the one I had in mind when I put forward that proposal. I'm not too bothered with you reporting me as you have done on a number of occasions in the past but what did annoy me was your reporting of a highly respected member of this Board recently. I have it on very good authority that you reported this member, a person who I believe to be the best contributor on this Forum bar none and a total gentleman of whom I'm certain everyone else would agree. I honestly don't think this guy has offended anyone in his three or so years of being on here. Yet you, having had a reasonable debate with him, decided to go scurrying off to the Moderators and stick the knife in his back. God knows how many other people you've done it to too.

Its no wonder you find the idea of a "list" horrifying because if people seen the amount of times you've gone to the Moderators, they'd hound you off the Site for good!

Thanks for the vote of confidence. Nice to see I'm on the right lines.

For reference, I have reported specific posts when they have been abusive to me. I don't recall ever reporting a member just because they were incapable of keeping their comments relevant and non-personal. if I ever did, it would clearly have been justified, as you've just proved with your post that doesn't stick to the topic, but instead refers to my reporting someone - unnamed, of course, but then calling for people to be named and shamed before refusing to do so yourself is in character for you. Some would call that behaviour hypocritical, but I wouldn't do that, as it would be getting personal, and I try to steer clear of that unless really provoked.

As I said before - IF you have any facts (that you claim come to you on 'good authority') then either post them or stop making baseless accusations. This has been asked before, and you always shy away from providing any 'evidence' to back up your assertions. I'm not holding my breath.

I also see that other posters have issues with you. You're kind enough to give us examples above. Thanks for that. It's clear that the problem here isn't me, but it's you and your inability to post sensible, calm, constructive debate without getting personal and abusive, at which point all attempts at proper, sensible threads are wasted.

One you get to the point where you can post without getting personal and abusive, then I'm sure everything will be fine. Until then, I'll wait to see what irrefutable evidence you have for your claims above. As I said, this won't be with baited breath....

 

[Swords Hoopster.]

Could we maybe start a thread along the lines of 'Venting space', where those who want to go and hurl abuse at each other, and make bold rash statements, to their hearts delight, and leave the rest of the threads for football matters.

That idea was agreed to the last time the rules were tinkered with mate. It was to be called a "Sub-Forum" but it never took off because the Super-Mod wouldn't allow it.
It was and still is a very good idea though.

Whatever some people post, there are others that will attack them regardless of what they said....it becomes tedious. Is Flyer always wrong?

This is another issue that's been raised a few times before. People getting involved in situations because they know the person "on the outside" as it were. This was never a problem in the beginning but it has become a concern in recent months.

Betty, for example, is always jumping in when someone has a go at Flyer for slagging off the team/Manager. Its obvious she's only doing this because she has a relationship with him in real life. No offence Betty but I'm just using you as an example here to highlight a problem that's become more mainstream of late. You're not the only one to bring this new dynamic to the table here.